REBTWhat is Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT)?:
Outlining the Approach by Considering the Four Elements of its Name
Windy Dryden Ph.D
REBT
2
Introduction
There have been many approaches to outline the defining features of Rational
Emotive Behaviour Therapy (e.g. Dryden, 2009, Ellis, 1994) but none have done
so just by detailing the four elements that comprise the name of the therapy: i)
rational; ii) emotive iii) behaviour and iv) therapy. In this article I will show how
you can teach trainees about REBT by using this four element approach. As you
read the article, please note that I am addressing trainees and students who do
not know about the approach or are relatively new to it.
Rational
When Albert Ellis established the therapy in the 1950s, he called it “Rational
Therapy” (Ellis, 1958). He did so because he wanted to stress that emotional
problems are based on irrational thinking and that if we are to address these
REBT
3
problems effectively, we need to change such thinking to its rational equivalent.
It is interesting to note that while REBT has had two previous names, the term
“rational” is common to all three names. It is the constant feature that spans
REBT’s 50+ year old history. So what do REBT therapists currently mean by the
term “rational”? I can best answer this question if I contrast it with the term
“irrational”
The terms “rational” and “irrational” in current REBT theory are most commonly
used as adjectives in front of the noun “beliefs”. Such beliefs can also be
thought of as attitudes in that they describe a person’s stance or position
towards something.
Let me consider the major characteristics of rational beliefs and contrast
these with the major characteristics of irrational beliefs. In what follows, I will
consider the rational belief in the left hand column and the irrational belief in
the right hand column to facilitate the comparison.
REBT
4
1. A rational belief is flexible
Here is an example of a rational belief that is
flexible.
“I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so”
Imagine that you hold such a belief. As you do so
you will see that this belief is flexible because while
you assert what you want (i.e. “I want my colleague to like me…”), you also acknowledge that you do not
have to get what you want (i.e. “…but she does not have to do so”).
2. A rational belief is non-extreme
Here is an example of a rational belief that is non-
extreme.
“It is bad if my colleague does not like me, but not the end of the world”
An Irrational Belief is Rigid or Extreme
1. An irrational belief is rigid
Here is an example of an irrational belief that is
rigid.
To compare this belief with the flexible version in
the left-hand column, we need to state it in its full
form
“I want my colleague to like me, therefore she has to do so”
Again imagine that you hold this belief. As you do so
you will see that this belief is rigid because while
you not only assert what you want (i.e. “I want my colleague to like me…”), you also demand that you
have to get it (i.e. “…therefore she has to do so”)
2. An irrational belief is extreme
Here is an example of an irrational belief that is
extreme.
“It is the end of the world if my colleague does not like me”
To compare it to the non-extreme version in the
left-hand column we need to state it in its full form
“It is bad if my colleague does not like me, and
REBT
5
Again imagine that you hold this belief. As you do so
you will see that this belief is non-extreme because
while you assert that you find the event negative
(i.e. “It is bad if my colleague does not like me…”), you also acknowledge that such an evaluation is not
extreme because it could always be worse (i.e. “…but not the end of the world”).
therefore it is the end of the world”
Again imagine that you hold this belief. As you do so
you will see that this belief is extreme because you
not only assert that you find the event negative (i.e.
“It is bad if my colleague does not like me…”), you
also claim that it could not be worse (i.e. “…and therefore it is the end of the world”).
A Rational Belief is True
Imagine that you hold the following rational belief
that I introduced above: “I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so”. You will
note that this belief is made up of two parts:
“I want my colleague to like me....”
“.... but she does not have to do so”
Let’s take one part at a time. First, you can prove
that you would like your colleague to like you; after
you this is your desire. Also, you can probably cite
reasons why you want your colleague to like you (e.g.
it makes for a good working relationship where you
can help each other). So, the first part of your
belief is true.
Now let’s look at the second part of the rational
belief. You can also prove that the other person
does not have to like you. To state otherwise would
An Irrational Belief is False
Now imagine that you hold the following irrational
belief that I introduced above: “My colleague has to like me” . Again this belief is made up of two parts:
“I want my colleague to like me....”
“.... and therefore she has to do so”
Let’s take one part at a time. First, you can again
prove that you would like the other person to like
you for reasons discussed opposite. So, the first
part of your belief is true.
Now let’s look at the second part of the irrational
belief. You cannot prove that your colleague has to
like you. If that were true, she would have no choice
but to like you. This demanding component of your
REBT
6
be to deny that person free choice.
So if both parts of this rational belief then we can
say that the belief taken as a whole is true.
irrational belief in effects robs your colleague of
free choice, which she retains in the face of your
demand. Thus, this second part is false.
As both parts of a belief have to be true for the
belief to be true the we can say that the irrational
belief is false.
short form (i.e. “My colleague has to like me”) then
it is clear that it is false since it again attempts to
rob your colleague of the freedom not to like you
which she does in reality have.
A Rational Belief is Sensible
Taking the rational belief: “I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so” we can ask
the question: does this belief make sense? We can
answer that it does since you are explicitly
acknowledging that there is no connection between
what you want and what you have to get.
An Irrational Belief is Not Sensible
Taking the full form of your irrational belief: “I want my colleague to like me, and therefore she has to do so” we can again ask the question: does this
belief makes sense? Here our answer is that it does
not because it asserts that there is a connection
between what you want and what you have to get.
The idea that because you want something you have
to get it is, in fact, childish nonsense when coming
from an adult.
When you hold a rational belief the consequences of
doing so will be largely constructive. For example
let’s suppose that you hold the following rational
belief: “I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so” and you bring this belief to a
situation where your colleague snaps at you for no
good reason. In this situation you will experience
three different, but related consequences which I
will now illustrate:
When you hold an irrational belief the consequences
of doing so will be largely unconstructive. For
example let’s suppose that you hold the following
irrational belief: “My colleague must like me” and
you bring this belief to the situation where your
colleague snaps at you for no good reason. In this
situation you will experience three different, but
related consequences which I will now illustrate. As
I do so, compare these consequences to those that
stem from your belief if it were rational (see
opposite)
Behavioural consequence
Here you will be likely to enquire of your colleague
in an open way if there is anything wrong
Thinking consequence
Here you will tend to think that your colleague is
upset with someone or something which could be to
do with you, but may well be nothing to do with you
Here you will tend to anxious, rather than
concerned about your colleague’s response
Behavioural consequence
Here you will tend not to avoid your colleague or try
desperately to get her to like you
Thinking consequence
Here you will tend to think that your colleague is
upset with you rather with someone or something
that had nothing to do with you
Emotive
The term “emotive” in REBT means that which is relevant to your emotions. Like
every other approach to therapy REBT is based on a model of emotions. Since
REBT is a therapeutic approach it is primarily concerned with relieving people’s
emotional disturbance. However, it also acknowledges that people are bound to
have negative emotions when faced with negative life events (henceforth called
adversities in this book). To accommodate these two positions REBT
REBT
8
distinguishes between emotions that are negative in tone and have largely
unconstructive consequences and emotions that are negative in tone and have
largely constructive consequences. The former are known as unhealthy negative
emotions (UNEs) and the latter healthy negative emotions (UNEs).
The REBT Model of Emotions
The REBT model of emotion states that the emotions that we experience are
based largely on the beliefs that we hold about ourselves, others and the world.
More specifically it states that our unhealthy negative emotions about life’s
adversities are based largely on the irrational beliefs that we hold about these
adversities and that if we want to experience healthy negative emotions about
the adversities in question we need to change our irrational beliefs to rational
beliefs.
This is shown in the following figure in which “A” stands for adversity, “B” for
beliefs and “C” for the consequences of these beliefs (in this case the emotional
REBT
9
consequences). This is REBT’s famous ABC model which you can find outlined in
any REBT textbook (e.g. Dryden & Branch, 2008).
A B C
Adversity Irrational Beliefs Unhealthy Negative Emotions
Adversity Rational Beliefs Healthy Negative Emotions
Let me illustrate this model by referring to the example that I introduced
earlier in this chapter
Irrational Belief
Unhealthy Negative Emotion
Rational Belief
but she does not have to do so
Healthy Negative Emotion
Concern
REBT
10
Because life’s adversities are negative, it is not appropriate for you to feel good
about them or even neutral about them. It is healthy to experience negative
emotions, but not problematic ones about such life events. These problematic
emotions in REBT are known as unhealthy negative emotions (UNEs) and these
are listed in the following table and contrasted with their healthy negative
equivalents
Anxiety Concern
Depression Sadness
Guilt Remorse
Shame Disappointment
I want to make two points here;
1. As detailed above, unhealthy negative emotions (UNEs) largely stem from
irrational beliefs about life’s adversities while healthy negative emotions
stem largely from rational beliefs about these same adversities.
2. We do not have commonly agreed words in the English language to
describe healthy negative emotions. The terms that I have used in the
right hand column of the above table are my own. Feel free to use
alternative terns that are more meaningful to you.
Intellectual vs. Emotive Understanding
The other major area where the term “emotive” comes up in REBT is in
distinguishing between two different types of understanding: intellectual
understanding and emotive understanding (Ellis, 1963). These are particularly
REBT
12
important when a person is trying to change an irrational belief to its rational
belief alternative.
Let me illustrate this distinction by using the above example where you
currently hold the irrational belief (i.e. “My colleague must like me”) and your
colleague has snapped at you. Let’s suppose that you acknowledge that your
irrational belief is irrational (meaning that it is rigid, false, not sensible and
largely unconstructive – see above). And let’s assume, furthermore, that you
acknowledge that your rational alternative belief (i.e. I want my colleague to like
me, but she does not have to do so”) is rational (meaning that it is flexible, true,
sensible and largely constructive. When your understanding of these two points
is intellectual in nature, you say things like “Well, I can understand this in my
head, but not in my heart” and “I understand it, but I don’t feel it”. Here, you
will still feel anxious about the prospect of your colleague not liking you, you will
act in ways that are consistent with your irrational belief (i.e. you will either
avoid your colleague or desperately try to get her to like you) and you will tend
to think in highly distorted ways about your colleague (e.g. “She is definitely
upset with me” and “If I don’t win her over immediately, she will never like me
again”). In other words, while you understand intellectually the reason why your
REBT
13
irrational belief is irrational belief and why your rational belief is rational, this
understand has little or no impact on your emotions, behaviour and subsequent
thinking. You still think, act and feel in ways consistent with your irrational
belief even though you know it is irrational.
However, when your understanding of these points is emotive in nature, you not
only grasp the points intellectually, but you also feel, think and act in ways that
are consistent with the rational belief and that are inconsistent with the
irrational belief. Thus, you will feel concerned, but not anxious about the
prospect of your colleague not liking you, you will act in ways that are consistent
with your rational belief (i.e. you will check out with her why she snapped at you)
and you will tend to think in realistic ways about your colleague (e.g. “She may or
may not be upset with me” and “If she is upset with me, we can talk it though
and resolve the issue”). In other words, you understand the reason why your
irrational belief is irrational belief and why your rational belief is rational and
this understanding has a decided constructive impact on your emotions,
behaviour and subsequent thinking. You think, act and feel in ways consistent
with your rational belief.
REBT
14
In REBT, we argue that intellectual understanding is a necessary, but
insufficient ingredient for constructive psychological change and many of the
chapters in this book are devoted to helping you to move from such intellectual
understanding to the emotive understanding necessary for such change to occur.
Behaviour
The term “behaviour” in REBT refers to both overt behaviour and to an urge to
act that is not translated into overt behaviour. The latter is known as an action
tendency. REBT’s model of behaviour parallels its model of emotions in arguing
that irrational beliefs tend to lead to behaviour that is largely unconstructive in
effect and that rational beliefs lead to behaviour that is largely constructive in
effect. The former is associated with unhealthy negative emotions (UNEs) and
the latter and the latter with healthy negative emotions (HNEs).
REBT
15
This is shown in the following figure in which “A” stands for adversity, “B” for
beliefs and “C” for the consequences of these beliefs (in this case the
behavioural consequences).
Adversity Irrational Beliefs Unconstructive Behaviour
Adversity Rational Beliefs Constructive Behaviour
Let me illustrate this model by referring again to the example that I introduced
earlier in this chapter
Irrational Belief
Unconstructive Behaviour
Rational Belief
but she does not have to do so
Constructive Behaviour
Asking colleague directly if
there is anything wrong
In the table below, I outline the major behaviours associated with the eight
unhealthy and healthy negative emotions listed above.
REBT
17
Associated Unconstructive Behaviours Associated Constructive Behaviours
and Action Tendencies and Action Tendencies
Anxiety
loss
Guilt
Maintaining eye contact with
Not restricting the other
of the desired possession
possession for oneself if it is
truly what you want
REBT
19
The behaviours listed are above are what a person does or tends to do when her
irrational or rational belief about an adversity has been fully activated.
However, the impact of belief on behaviour can be seen in other ways.
Short-term Self-protective Behaviour
In the ABC model that I have presented in this article, an adversity occurs or is
deemed to occur at “A”, the person holds a belief about this adversity at “B”
and experiences emotional, behavioural and thinking consequences of holding
this belief at “C”. In this model the person’s belief (e.g. “My colleague must like
me”) is specific to the specific adversity that she encounters.
However, beliefs can be held at a more general level (e.g. “People with whom I
work must like me”) and when a belief is more general in nature, the person has
a tendency to bring such a belief with them, as it were, to situations where a
relevant adversity may occur. Thus, in our example, if a person holds a general
irrational belief (e.g. “People with whom I work must like me”), then the person
REBT
20
will be hypersensitive to the possibility of not being liked by a colleague and act
to prevent this adversity actually occurring (e.g. by being extra nice to a person
whom she thinks may, but has not yet shown her some disapproval). In this way
the person is acting to protect herself in the short-term, but the longer-term
effect of this behaviour is unconstructive in a number of ways:
She does not get to test out her hunch that the person will disapprove of
her
She does not get to deal constructively with such disapproval should it
occur and
She tends to maintain her irrational belief since she is acting in a way
that is consistent with it
Over-compensatory Behaviour
When a person holds an irrational belief and particularly one that is general in
nature, then she may try to deal with actual or potential adversities by behaving
REBT
21
in a manner that is over-compensatory. By using over-compensatory behaviour
the person is trying to prove to herself the opposite of what she actually thinks
is the truth about her, the other person or the world. A common example of
this occurs when a person privately considers that he would be weak if he can’t
deal with a challenge, but tries to prove to himself that he is strong by facing
an even greater challenge.
Therapy
The word “therapy” comes from the Greek "therapeia" meaning "a service, an
attendance" which, in turn, is related to the Greek verb "therapeuo" meaning "I
wait upon."
REBT therapists, therefore, can be seen to offer a “service” to people who have
problems in a number of areas: i) emotional problems; ii) practical,
REBT
22
dissatisfaction problems and iii) personal development problems (Bard, 1980,
Grieger & Boyd, 1980 ; Wessler & Wessler, 1980). A distinctive feature of REBT
is that it outlines a logical order for dealing with these problems.
Disturbance before Dissatisfaction
REBT argues that unless there are good reasons to the contrary, it is best for
us to address our emotional problems before our dissatisfaction problems
(Dryden, 1985). The reasoning is as follows. If we try and deal with our
dissatisfaction before we deal with our emotional disturbance, then our
disturbed feelings will get in the way of our efforts to change directly the
adversities about which we are dissatisfied.
For example, let’s take the example of Paul who is dissatisfied about his wife’s
spending habits. However, he is also unhealthily angry about her behaviour and
every time he talks to her about it he makes himself angry about it, raises his
voice to his wife and makes pejorative remarks about her and her spending
REBT
23
behaviour. Now what is the likely impact of Paul’s expression of unhealthy anger
on his wife? Does it encourage her to stand back and look objectively at her own
behaviour? Of course, it doesn’t. Paul’s angry behaviour is more likely to lead his
wife to become unhealthily angry herself and/or to become defensive. In Paul’s
case, his anger had, in fact, both effects on his wife. Now, let’s suppose that
Paul first addressed his unhealthy anger and then discussed his dissatisfaction
with his wife. His annoyance at her behaviour, but his acceptance of her as a
person would help him to view her own behaviour perhaps as a sign of emotional
disturbance and his compassion for her would have very different effects on
her. She would probably be less defensive and because Paul would not be
unhealthily angry, then his wife would also be less likely to be unhealthily angry.
With anger out of the picture, the stage would be set for Paul to address the
reasons for his dissatisfaction more effectively.
Disturbance before Development
REBT
24
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, I used to go to a number of encounter
groups. This was the era of personal growth or development. However, there
were a number of casualties of these groups and when these occurred it was
because attendees were preoccupied with issues of emotional disturbance and
they were being pushed too very hard to go into areas of development that
warranted greater resilience.
In general then, it is very difficult for us to develop ourselves when we are
emotionally disturbed. To focus on areas of development when someone is
emotionally disturbed is akin to encourage that person to climb a very steep hill
with very heavy weights attached to their ankles. First, help the person to
remove their ankle weights (i.e. address their emotional disturbance) before
discussing the best way of climbing the hill!
Dissatisfaction before Development
REBT
25
Abraham Maslow (1968) is perhaps best known for his work on self-
actualisation. The relevance of this concept for our present discussion is this.
It is very difficult for humans to focus on higher order “needs” when we are
preoccupied with issues with respect to lower-order needs. Thus, if a person is
faced with a general dissatisfying life experience which cannot be
compartmentalised and also wants to explore his writing ambitions, he should
address the former first unless this life dissatisfaction will help him write a
better book!
While I have outlined REBT’s preferred order in dealing with problems, it also
values flexibility. Thus, if a person wants to deal with his problems in a
different order, he should do so and observe the results. If it works, that is
fine. If not then REBT’s preferred position may prove to yield better results.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating!
Conclusion
REBT
26
While outlining REBT by considering the four elements that comprise its name is
not comprehensive, it does introduce trainees and other students relatively
unfamiliar with REBT with some of its key elements.
REBT
27
References
Research Press.
Dryden, W. (1985). Marital therapy: The rational-emotive approach. In W.
Dryden (Ed.), Marital therapy in Britain. Volume 1: Context and therapeutic
approaches. London: Harper & Row
features. London: Routledge.
Dryden, W., & Branch, R. (2008). The fundamentals of rational emotive
behaviour therapy: A training handbook. 2nd edition. Chichester: Wiley.
Ellis, A. (1958). Rational psychotherapy. The Journal of General
Psychology, 59, 35-49.
Ellis, A. (1963). Toward a more precise definition of "emotional" and
"intellectual" insight. Psychological Reports, 13, 125-126.
Ellis, A. (1994). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy, Revised and
updated. Secaucus, NJ: Carol.
REBT
28
Grieger, R. M. and Boyd, J. (1980). Rational–emotive therapy: A
skills-based approach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van
Nostrand.
Wessler, R. A. and Wessler, R. L. (1980). The principles and practice of
rational–emotive therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.